Full Judgment Text
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2497 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP(C) No.23034/2007)
STATE OF TAMIL NADU & ORS. Appellant(s)
:VERSUS:
E. RANGACHARI Respondent(s)
O R D E R
1. Delay condoned. Leave granted.
2. This appeal emanates from the judgment and
th
order dated 19 October, 2006 passed by the High
Court of Judicature at Madras in Writ Petition
No.11925 of 2004 by which the High Court has upheld
JUDGMENT
the judgment of the Tamil Nadu Administrative
Tribunal and dismissed the writ petition.
3. The respondent joined service as a Junior
Assistant on 14.09.1973. Subsequently, he was
promoted to the post of Assistant and in the year
1986 he was promoted to the post of Sub Registrar.
While working as Sub Registrar, on the allegation of
Page 1
2
demand and accepting bribe, he was trapped and
arrested in the year 1997 and was subsequently
released. During the period of arrest, the
respondent was placed under suspension and the
suspension was subsequently revoked by the Tamil
Nadu Administrative Tribunal.
4. Since the respondent was under suspension,
his name was not included in the panel for the post
of District Registrar for the year 1998-99.
Aggrieved by this non-inclusion, he filed O.A.
before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal which
was allowed. The State challenged the order of the
Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal before the High
Court by filing a writ petition. The High Court
upheld the order passed by the Tamil Nadu
JUDGMENT
Administrative Tribunal and dismissed the writ
petition.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the
parties. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
respondent does not dispute that a criminal case is
pending against the respondent and it is at the
final stage of hearing. Admittedly, the charge-sheet
Page 2
3
was filed long back and the case has proceeded
further. The respondent has now superannuated from
service.
6. In the backdrop of the facts stated above,
the impugned judgment as also the judgment of the
Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal cannot be
sustained. Both these judgments are, therefore, set
aside. In case the respondent is acquitted in the
criminal case, he would be entitled to all the
reliefs according to the rules. With these
observations and direction this appeal is allowed
and disposed of.
7. The parties are directed to bear their
respective costs.
JUDGMENT
.....................J
(DALVEER BHANDARI)
.....................J
(DIPAK MISRA)
New Delhi;
February 22, 2012.
Page 3